Talk:World 5/@comment-37955540-20190206044221/@comment-103.208.220.146-20190208113528
On the contrary, I do understand your point. Buffed enemies? Cool. Bring them on. Who doesn't like challenges? We're talking about a game for god's sake. Also, we have some people around here who are just bad players at core, like that guy who said that he had around half of hundred sorties in easier maps. However, my problem with you is that you seem to not acknowledge the feedback from those who are legitimately concerned about the buff, including those who have actually beat the buffed SWP. I'm also one of those guys. A part of me enjoyed beating the crap out of the SWP but at the same time, this set a dangerous precedent that could shorten the game's lifespan. And you're still giving that 4 medals per month BS. Since you talked about only having 4m per month in the past, I take that you started with at most 12 BPs backlog. In theory, you could already finish the backlog within 2 years since the BP remodels weren't as hot as now. How about the guys who started in 2017? Let's say 20 BPs backlog. If we take 5-5 and out of factors, we would have up to 6m per month since we have 3 quarterly quests that reward 1m each. Also, we should expect about 9 BPs used for new remodels per year, on top of that backlog. Given that the player for some reason can already get that average amount of medals per month right since 1st month, he needs at least 28 months to clear the backlog. If the player were to follow what you say, 4m from EOs + 1 from quarterlies, at least 43 fucking months. '''Short reminder that this is for 20 BPs. Any newbie that goes in today pre-maintenance will carry '''42 BPs backlog max by default. '''If you suggest that players can be strong-armed into playing the game for years with this backlog, I'm sorry: This won't work. More players will quit than the new ones coming in. If the gaming industry were to tell me something, it's that players prefer more choices and they absolutely detest it when choices were taken from them. In our case, it's the same goddamn medal that people have been getting with a more available comp for a long time. The players in this backlog situation aren't likely to be satisfied by beating the buffed SWP. That's why I've said that I'm sure about how no one will laugh at beating easy comps. I find it funny imagining that you'd laugh every month you beat the SWP but for sure they won't also be happy about beating the buffed SWP since that's the most inefficient way to get a medal. In fact, they will get demoralized by having to choose every month between sinking an event-crippling amount of resources or face the backlog ridiculously longer. Then, the likelihood of them quitting the game entirely increases. We're currently at a phase when players don't need progression cutters in their routine. We don't even need realm of uncertainty like poor rare drop experience to drop our morale because the realm of certainty itself has already let players' down. So, since you're afraid that the game will be a breeze and because of that you'll quit, let me ask you something: Would you let the game quit on you and shut down for good? Now, allow me to dive down to what else you wrote: '''You must be joking with me. It is not the case that the majority is always correct. For instance, classic physics was thought to be complete by the majority until discovery of things like quantum physics by a few. If a comp is no longer good after buff, it is just bad for the new map. Forget about it, and move forward. This again. Do you have a brick for your skull? I told you many times: Only the select best few comps survive the buff. If you don't understand what optimal means, it means it delivers while consuming less resources as possible. Best doesn't mean optimal. In fact, they forced players to use comps that perform the best at doing the job but at the same time consume the most resources. If we were to fight pre-buff SWP, the best comps aren't optimal. They are suboptimal because they eat more resources while overkilling the boss fleet. Understand the difference the choice between the best comp and the optimal comp. Like in 3-5, the best comp for LD is the CV fleet but the most optimal comp that still has a good chance to clear the map is 1CL/Nisshin 5DD. If we were to extrapolate 3-5 into 5-5 situation, we will be forced to use the carrier fleet because the torp fleet no longer works. That's the situation we're in but worse because we're fundamentally forced to use Yamasushi in order to actually stand a chance when going up against buffed SWP. (1) Getting harder encounter does not equal to 0% boss sink rate, you are just wrong mathematically there. (2) SWP can be sunk with normal ships, do your maths there. (3) And you just said the other 50% is doable, so why not just do it? Do you realize that it's not 50% doable since the SWP can block your attacks and the CV boss has high armor? It's 50% roll to get CV boss comps and another low rate to actually attack the boss rather than the SWP escort, let alone kill the boss, you donut. How 6-5 has changed over time has nothing to do with 5-5. You are comparing apples to oranges. The point is how player progression positively affects his experience in 6-5 and other maps, and how a change in numbers just denies players 5-5 medal. I'm starting to wonder your capability to extrapolate, a possible cause of this debate. So you want to get a medal but does not want to use a good comp? And with the flip of a switch 5-5 cannot be cleared? My argument is: people were fine with 4 medals per month, and when they are given more, they complain. Playing some of the maps better is good for us, but it does not mean it must happen to every map. Just like technology improves many aspects of life, there is no law to say it must improve every aspect of life. I've already said against this above. 4m per month means jack shit. Even you said that players can have more satisfaction when going out with a good comp but I'd rather it happen with more ships and features than forcing us to use an ultra-heavy comp. That satisfaction can only happen once or twice and we're dealing with a recurring map here, not an event. Phase 2 is already different from phase 1. Maps with different nodes and encounters can be considered as new maps. By difficulty got out of hand, you mean some comps have difficulty clearing the map. It is completely different from the statement that there is no single comp that can clear the map reliably. I'm seriously starting to be apprehensive about your comprehension. I was talking about the same Phase 2 map being buffed, not when Phase 1 map transformed into Phase 2. By difficulty got out of hand, I mean only the ultra-hungry comps are usable. '''Have you even done 5-5 before the buff and after the opening of Phase 2 using comps with at most one of them being Yamasushi without support? They were reliable and thus were optimal. Now, those are gone. We're stuck to Yamasushi and mandatory boss support for reliable kills. Oh wait. Marriage fleet below. '''First of all, I spent 12163/7730/13063/480 and 48 buckets this month. That is about the same as phase 1. I spend much less bauxite in phase 2 thanks to Ise k2 and airplane proficiency. If you are spending more, there is probably a problem with your comp. In case you don't know: (1) Marriage fleet consumes 15% less resources. (2) They land more hits. (3) They artispots more often. (2+3) So, they can kill before they get killed first, more often. (4) They dodge more often. You save way more than 15% resources since you sortie less attempts. You may say that it's just single digit percentage here and there but with all maths accounted for, that consumption could be even roughly just 50% of a Lv99 fleet with the same girls. Don't ever suggest P2W ringfest after this. That is because those one who laughs just copy comps from internet. There are two points to argue here. First of all, many of the maps can be cleared with different comps, and I do clear with different comps when I feel like it, or I have to do certain quests. Secondly, if one uses the same comps to clear EOs over time, it just means that he is not adapting to changes. It is like people trying hard with their old comps in new 5-5, and refuse to do anything on their end. The problem is changing from Yamasushi fleet for frontline, to only a single-Yamasushi fleet for optimization, and then forced to use heaviest comp ever used post-buff on the same map. If you laugh at using a fleet like that, you've gone slightly cuckoo. So you enjoy other hard challenges, but not 5-5, good to know. I said 4 of those medals are easy to obtain, it does not mean those are the only medals the newer players can obtain. I started the game without clearing old 5-5 for about half a year, and there was no 4-5. I slowly grind through with 3 medals per month. I was fine there, so why new players cannot be a bit more patient? You said only a select few shipgirls can stand a chance against SWP. Does it mean other ships are completely hopeless? I want to see someone other than myself giving some calculations. And about CLTs? Poor survivability and bad day-time shelling. I will treat that as a joke. Again. Look up and you'll know. However, I take that you saying girls not being completely hopeless even if they only have 10% chance to counter. Talk about telling people to go optimal. That is my optimal solution. You clearly cannot read. You can't either. Sorry. Reading the same shit really takes a toll. Read above once more if you don't hammer in your head what optimal means and what optimal fleets are pre-buff. How do you define a competent player? Is a player with good ships and equipment, but brings bad comps to 5-5 considered competent? What does the complains lead you? Do they yield any positive outcomes, such as better comps if they instead writing threads on how to improve their comps? I would have to say good judgment and planning. Are you competent in that sense? For all I know is that you simply suggest a brute force fleet to everyone without thinking the long term repercussions. You are calling other players competent and veterans. Isn't that elitism for you? And how is my mindset of discussing better comps an exhibition of elitism? Elitism is you just tell everyone to suck it up or go home. How is me sympathizing with newer players elitistic? I think I'm pushing a button here. (1) There are games that are easier, but it does not mean kancolle needs to be as easy. I guess you completely forget that kancolle is rng-based game, and the way to git gud is to use better comps. If you ignore that fact, and only whine about how how hard the game gets, you will go nowhere. Oh btw, my point in the post is not about getting better at the game, but to suggest that one should look at their problems and seek for improvements before complaning. It doesn't need to make it harder for newer players either. If players get too few and the game shuts down, where will you go with all this? Nowhere as well. And my point is that you should look at the problem this buff has raised and the precedent it has set, instead of going around advising people while at the same time assuming that they haven't done what you urge them to do. You sure whine a lot for someone who doesn't like textual noises. I am going to end with a question: which one benefits the playerbase more? (1) Whine about how hard the game is (at somewhere the devs do not even look at); (2) discuss how comps can be improved. In your surprise, I'd say both. Why? Whining means that there's a problem. In this case, some people have problems clearing 5-5. Then, as a part of the community, some people will go in to help (e.g. you). If the help isn't enough or another problem it discovered, the process goes to a different direction, like we started to talk about why only comps with heavy shit are reliable right now. And the last 2 steps reach another iteration, like how this buff is actually harming the playerbase. Mind you that whining is just a signal to an underlying problem. If your solution doesn't tune the whine down, that means the problem is different than what you think. Like you said, new comps, new solutions. You just hear people talk about shit, brood about it, give people a solution, hear people talking about how this is a band aid for a long term problem, then brood some more about it, and tell people to shut up. At this point, you already gave up thinking. For someone who just tell people to suck it all up, you yourself gave up thinking outside your regular mindset. You ain't as good as what you think you are in this web space. So, stop telling people to shut up and be grateful like an Asian parent if your band aid doesn't solve a major problem here. The whining will change naturally. It's just that the devs need to know more about this issue. Like I've said before: The real long term solution for entertaining difficulty is to bring in more innovative quests and maps. Older players get to play with more things, whereas newer ones get to keep the steady farm to grow. Best of both worlds. Personally, I think a TP route on a new regular map would be cool. Then, the quest goes like this: Bring 70 TP in a sortie and make it count at the end of a boss fight. I'm sure that people be like "Awwwww Hell naw." The end. Though unlike you, I can respond more if you say different things.